Re: The problem of relativistic synchronisation

Le 03/09/2024 à 11:07, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :

Le 03/09/2024 à 01:04, Python a écrit :

>
Sorry Richard, but the notation tX(eN) is, according to yourself,
supposed to mean "time for clock X of event eN" (which is out of the
scope of a synchronization procedure if the event eN took place
far from clock X anyway).
>
So when you write tA'(e2) your referencing a third clock named A'
which is definitely not a part of the synchronization procedure
that only involves TWO clocks. Worse now, tB' refer to a fourth
clocks.
>
What the hell is happening in your mind, Richard?
>
You are not even trying to make sense anymore. Anyway you've
already failed at that.

 But no, I did not fail.
On the contrary, I told you, we will burn all the tanks, don't worry, and the relativistic data on the problem of Paul B. Andersen's synchronization will be written down.
Don't worry, Jean-Pierre, don't worry.
It's even worse than that, I will list not only the eight data, but all twelve, I will invent an additional event e3 which is the conjunction BB' in the problem.
 Let tA(e3), tA'(e3), tB(e3), tB'(e3).
 Don't worry Jean-Pierre, we will burn all your tanks, and the planes too.

 You are loosing your marbles Richard.